Re: F21 partitioning circus
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 10:24 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On 02/25/2015 09:30 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: > >> If people aren't actually going to test what we have, and file bug >> report, > > If you want to see this thing fixed, tested and see bug reports, then > publish updates on a regular basis. Monthly network installer iso images, > for instance. Rawhide nightlies have boot.iso (which is network installer ISO). But that isn't even necessary, any bug report is better than zero report. And I did say to cc me on the bug. If it's a coherent report and easily reproduced, I can incidentally confirm/deny it in a newer build. > >> Stability and trustworthiness are immensely more valuable in a GUI >> installer than "expert" features; > > I once again disagree. This is populism and over-generalization. > > "80% of all US-American eat burgers twice a week => all we need is to > support burgers - Mind you?" It is not a populist argument, because I argued against the much larger expert category in favor of the much smaller vision impaired user base. My argument is about giving as many users access as possible without negatively affecting others. And quite frankly as a predominately OS X user, I think I have some qualification when I say the fact I'm comfortable making rather advanced storage stacks at linux CLI indicates anyone who claims to be a power user / expert already has sufficient access. You do not need more access, you simply want more access. But that access siphons resources away from others, and your inevitably more cluttered expert UI makes everyone's life including newbie users more difficult. Be happy with kickstart, honestly, there's nothing really like it on either Windows or OS X. Or hey, another option is to pick up a shovel and help with blivet-gui etc. > > And yes, an aspect, we haven't yet discussed is the look'n'feel of the GUI - > Sure, this is personal taste, I do not consider the anaconda GUI changes as > improvements. I have criticized the UI/UX of the installer. I have almost totally given up on that at this point because there's just no will power on the part of Anaconda to fix it, absent extremely clear proven concepts to fix the deficiencies rather than just throw spaghetti at a wall to find out how many less users the UI/UX annoys. So if you have some mock ups and at least clear rationalization of how this improves UI/UX, file an RFE. But it's better if you can at least ping the Fedora UI expert: http://blog.linuxgrrl.com/ which is, BTW, where mockups of the Anaconda new UI appeared almost a year before they were baked into the installer. And it was a few months before Fedora 18 that had the best chance for having the most affect with the least burden for demonstrating how things needed to be different - and that ship has sailed. (And I know because I missed it also.) > >> let alone "expert" features that >> only sometimes work. > > Once again: I feel you are trying to have "smart" features - This is not > what "experts" want - Tough. >They want full control, Tough. No. Get used to disappointment. I'm not sympathetic. > should be able to cope with > errors, No because a GUI application itself must have error handling internally to keep it from doing basic things like, you know, crashing. > so all you'd have to do would be to enable them to to so. No. > Unfortunately, I can't see this in recent installers. OK well I'll put you in the troublemaker category too because you keep saying you see problems but you've given no examples and you've supplied no bug reports. -- Chris Murphy -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: The earliest release of Linux by Linus Torvalds
In the very early days, the only way to get Linux components was by dialup download. There were no "distributions". It was everybody for themselves. If one had an issue, it was easy to email Linus or Alan Cox. I did a few ports in 1992/93 including things like gated and imapd and Alan and/or Linus made the necessary kernel mods when I needed them. Interesting times - specially when changing things like libc. On 26/02/15 13:54, jd1008 wrote: I found https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/Historic/ and https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/Historic/old-versions/ and http://draconux.free.fr/os_dev/linux0.01.html But I cannot find any first CD iso releases. Thanks for any links. -- = Stephen Davies Consulting P/L Phone: 08-8177 1595 Adelaide, South Australia.Mobile:040 304 0583 Records & Collections Management. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21 partitioning circus
On 02/25/2015 09:30 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: If people aren't actually going to test what we have, and file bug report, If you want to see this thing fixed, tested and see bug reports, then publish updates on a regular basis. Monthly network installer iso images, for instance. Stability and trustworthiness are immensely more valuable in a GUI installer than "expert" features; I once again disagree. This is populism and over-generalization. "80% of all US-American eat burgers twice a week => all we need is to support burgers - Mind you?" And yes, an aspect, we haven't yet discussed is the look'n'feel of the GUI - Sure, this is personal taste, I do not consider the anaconda GUI changes as improvements. let alone "expert" features that only sometimes work. Once again: I feel you are trying to have "smart" features - This is not what "experts" want - They want full control, should be able to cope with errors, so all you'd have to do would be to enable them to to so. Unfortunately, I can't see this in recent installers. Ralf -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: The earliest release of Linux by Linus Torvalds
On 02/26/2015 04:43 AM, Dave Stevens wrote: Quoting jd1008 : I found https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/Historic/ and https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/Historic/old-versions/ and http://draconux.free.fr/os_dev/linux0.01.html But I cannot find any first CD iso releases. Thanks for any links. was it even on CD? I am pretty sure, there wasn't any. My first slackware came from walnut creek on diskettes (20 of 'em!) The very first Linux, I played with, consisted of ca. 4 floppies (IIRC, these were published be Linus T.). However, these were very soon replaced by floppies from SLS and later from Slackware. The first Linux on CD, I had, came from S.u.S.E. Ralf -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: The earliest release of Linux by Linus Torvalds
Once upon a time, jd1008 said: > I found > https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/Historic/ > and > https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/Historic/old-versions/ > and > http://draconux.free.fr/os_dev/linux0.01.html > > But I cannot find any first CD iso releases. Linus just does the kernel, not distribution ISOs, so you won't find any from him. The earliest Linux I ran was in the pre-distribution days, when H.J. Lu at MIT (who IIRC maintained the early Linux ports of gcc/binutils and libc) put together boot/root floppy sets. You had the "boot" floppy, which was just a kernel; it would load and then prompt you to insert the root filesystem floppy and press return. You then inserted the "root" floppy, which had your basic root filesystem. It was a big deal when he trimmed things down enough to make a single boot/root combined floppy; you didn't have to change disks! It booted to a bash prompt, and had basic tools like ls, vi, fdisk, and mkfs. I don't believe I have any of those old floppy images anymore, and I didn't find copies when I looked around a few years ago. I think I still have some Slackware floppies in a box in my storage room, probably from early 1995. The oldest Red Hat product I have is Red Hat Linux 3.0.3 on CD, from 1996. Since a lot of systems then didn't boot from CD (or didn't even have CD), the CD set included the floppy images that you could also use to install. -- Chris Adams -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: The earliest release of Linux by Linus Torvalds
Quoting jd1008 : I found https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/Historic/ and https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/Historic/old-versions/ and http://draconux.free.fr/os_dev/linux0.01.html But I cannot find any first CD iso releases. Thanks for any links. was it even on CD? My first slackware came from walnut creek on diskettes (20 of 'em!) Dave -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org -- "As long as politics is the shadow cast on society by big business, the attenuation of the shadow will not change the substance." -- John Dewey -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
The earliest release of Linux by Linus Torvalds
I found https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/Historic/ and https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/Historic/old-versions/ and http://draconux.free.fr/os_dev/linux0.01.html But I cannot find any first CD iso releases. Thanks for any links. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21 partitioning circus
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 4:44 PM, Joe Zeff wrote: > On 02/25/2015 03:27 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: >> >> But no, you were just being a discourteous >> person. > > > Actually, until you made it clear that one of your main reasons for posting > was to create dissension, You keep making these grandiose, broad sweeping, and false assertions: You want to take [Linux flexibility] away. I see: you're simply a troll. you're completely unwilling to accept the possibility that you might be wrong And now this latest distortion of "I also like causing dissonance in others when I think they're wrong" which is hardly the main reason for my posts, let alone clearly so, let alone even about dissension. And that's just today. Please stop. > Last, I'd like to point out that I've not been asking for things that I > personally need, I've been supporting my position on a matter of principle: > specifically the principle that the person doing the installation should be > the final judge of how they want things set up, not the developers. OK well you're wrong on the matter of principle because "wanting" is not good enough. There is no entitlement without the work. Users are routinely terrible at articulating what they want, so even building what they say they want is folly. They're only saying they wan a thing because they don't know what else to ask for or how to ask it. I reject the principle the user is always right (or the developer, or me for that matter). And self evidently you're wrong on the matter of turning your principle into practice. The very fact your principle can't consistently be realized except through developer coercion to build things against their better judgement and always and only "what the user wants" is how demonstrably flawed it is. We need more work narrowing the difference between developer and user, so that users can more easily be developers, or even get so far as to blur the line entirely. But if anything, we're seeing computing get farther and farther away from this, more and more specialized as users and developers go separate ways. You cannot fix that problem by pontificating some abstract principle subscribing to the user want being an inherent good. It's already difficult to fix this problem because the current paradigm means growing numbers of developers and users, so current behaviors are self-rewarding (or at worst, they seem safe). I like this Steve Job quote: But in the end, for something this complicated, it's really hard to design products by focus groups. A lot of times, people don't know what they want until you show it to them. -- Chris Murphy -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Qt 4.x -- Qt 5.x -- qtgrace -- segfault
Hi, I've tried to build and run qtgrace on fedora 20 and it almost always segfaults. The only time it worked was within a remote desktop running in x2go. I have attempted with both Qt 4.x and 5.x from the fedora repo. qtgrace http://qtgrace.sourceforge.net/ I tried this posted solution but it still failed on Gnome, LXDE and Cinnamon. It also did not work in the x2go session. http://sourceforge.net/p/qtgrace/discussion/1358966/thread/838fa2a4/#2e35 There are a number of similar questions found on the software site help and Discussion pages. - Open Disscussion: http://sourceforge.net/p/qtgrace/discussion/1358965/ Help http://sourceforge.net/p/qtgrace/discussion/1358966/ Any advice to fix this is appreciated. If a Qt developer can troubleshoot and also advise the developer on creating a fedora/centos rpm this would be great. Thank you, Kevin -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21 partitioning circus
On 02/25/2015 03:27 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: But no, you were just being a discourteous person. Actually, until you made it clear that one of your main reasons for posting was to create dissension, I've been very, very careful to remain civil and I intend to continue that way. I'm not saying that you've been rude or used ad homonem arguments because I don't want this to turn into a flame-war, just stating that I've tried my best to remain objective. Last, I'd like to point out that I've not been asking for things that I personally need, I've been supporting my position on a matter of principle: specifically the principle that the person doing the installation should be the final judge of how they want things set up, not the developers. And, since you've very kindly pointed out how that can be done with the current version of anaconda, I have no reason to continue arguing about it. Is there a reason you don't want to drop the subject? -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21 partitioning circus
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 4:21 PM, Joe Zeff wrote: > On 02/25/2015 03:15 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: >> No, my posts are designed to hold people accountable for things they >> say, and insist they provide facts, not mere opinions. If that demand >> just so happens to cause the conjecturing factless troublemaker some >> consternation, I might smile, but that's completely incidental not the >> goal. >> > > Crickets chirping... Offers one of the guys who didn't even have the courtesy in 100 emails to actually run into the problem he was claiming was a problem that needed someone else do to the work for him to change. You could have had the courtesy to do a VM test install in order to have a common frame of reference with the people asking you over and over again, WTF are you complaining about. But no, you were just being a discourteous person. And I know that now, so please be absolutely positively shocked if I offer you help when you actually need it. -- Chris Murphy -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21 partitioning circus
On 02/25/2015 03:15 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 4:04 PM, Joe Zeff wrote: On 02/25/2015 02:55 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: THAT'S THE F'N DEFINITION OF TROLLING. FACTLESS! No, trolling is making posts designed to get other people angry and cause dissention, which you've already admitted to doing. No more food for you, troll. No, my posts are designed to hold people accountable for things they say, and insist they provide facts, not mere opinions. If that demand just so happens to cause the conjecturing factless troublemaker some consternation, I might smile, but that's completely incidental not the goal. Crickets chirping... -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21 partitioning circus
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 4:04 PM, Joe Zeff wrote: > On 02/25/2015 02:55 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: >> >> THAT'S THE F'N DEFINITION OF TROLLING. FACTLESS! > > > No, trolling is making posts designed to get other people angry and cause > dissention, which you've already admitted to doing. No more food for you, > troll. No, my posts are designed to hold people accountable for things they say, and insist they provide facts, not mere opinions. If that demand just so happens to cause the conjecturing factless troublemaker some consternation, I might smile, but that's completely incidental not the goal. -- Chris Murphy -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21 partitioning circus
On 02/25/2015 02:55 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: By all means unleash your billy goat, because no doubt it can conduct a debate better than you have. Fine debaters, billy goats. I'll bet your billy goat has bugs filed before you do at this rate. Weird is anything you don't approve of. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21 partitioning circus
On 02/25/2015 02:55 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: THAT'S THE F'N DEFINITION OF TROLLING. FACTLESS! No, trolling is making posts designed to get other people angry and cause dissention, which you've already admitted to doing. No more food for you, troll. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21 partitioning circus
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 3:37 PM, Joe Zeff wrote: > On 02/25/2015 02:22 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: >> >> No in fact I love being wrong, it means I get to learn something new >> and I value that more than being right. But shadenfreude is delicious, >> so I also like causing dissonance in others when I think they're >> wrong. > > > I see: you're simply a troll. Get back under your bridge before I unleash > my billy goat. Uh huh, well if I'm the troll, why is it I actually answer your questions, while for three days you've dodged mine to provide examples of what you can't do that you want to do? And where are your bug reports of how things behave contrary to your expectations? And now it all comes down to, you haven't even tried it, and you're uncertain? THAT'S THE F'N DEFINITION OF TROLLING. FACTLESS! By all means unleash your billy goat, because no doubt it can conduct a debate better than you have. Fine debaters, billy goats. I'll bet your billy goat has bugs filed before you do at this rate. -- Chris Murphy -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21 partitioning circus
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 3:36 PM, Joe Zeff wrote: > On 02/25/2015 02:22 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: >> >> So 75+ emails on a thread about how the installer can't do what you >> want, and it's actually based on uncertainty? You need more Pai Mei in >> your life. I have obviously been way, way too diplomatic and patient. > > > One of the many things I like about Linux is the flexibility. You want to > take it away. I've said nor implied no such thing. I've very specifically applied feature creep criticism to the GUI installer, and as yet I haven't even said what I would take away from the current GUI installer, only that I wouldn't add any more functionality to it until what we have now is better stabilized. > Just because I don't currently need to create weird > partitioning schemes doesn't mean that I don't value it. Kickstart. CLI tools. Not GUI installer. Weird does not belong, AT ALL, in the GUI installer. Weird is untrustworthy. Weird is unintuitive. Weird is capricious. They are incompatible with positive, clean, quick UX. The GUI installer is unique, users don't use it often, they shouldn't even have to depend on any documentation if it does its job correctly. -- Chris Murphy -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21 partitioning circus
On 02/25/2015 02:30 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: They are provided by default, they're hard dependencies by Anaconda. Thank you; as I've said, it's been years since I've needed to do a clean install of Fedora. As long as they're available, and as long as you can make whatever selections of mount points you need, that's all I would want. And, it makes it harder for newcomers to fsck things up too badly because they're much less likely to know how to get to them or use them. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21 partitioning circus
On 02/25/2015 02:22 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: No in fact I love being wrong, it means I get to learn something new and I value that more than being right. But shadenfreude is delicious, so I also like causing dissonance in others when I think they're wrong. I see: you're simply a troll. Get back under your bridge before I unleash my billy goat. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21 partitioning circus
On 02/25/2015 02:22 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: So 75+ emails on a thread about how the installer can't do what you want, and it's actually based on uncertainty? You need more Pai Mei in your life. I have obviously been way, way too diplomatic and patient. One of the many things I like about Linux is the flexibility. You want to take it away. Just because I don't currently need to create weird partitioning schemes doesn't mean that I don't value it. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21 partitioning circus
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 3:22 PM, Joe Zeff wrote: > An excellent point. If the needed CLI tools are provided by default, that's > all that's really needed, isn't it? (Having this mentioned either in the > installer's instructions or in the on-line Documentation would be a Good > Idea as well.) They are provided by default, they're hard dependencies by Anaconda. It's not always the case gdisk is available, and maybe not fdisk (although I've never seen it missing) because anaconda uses parted to manipulate both MBR and GPT partitions. http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/21/html/Installation_Guide/sect-installation-gui-manual-partitioning.html Starting with "To discard all changes..." -- Chris Murphy -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21 partitioning circus
On 02/25/2015 02:05 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: Why do you need a button in the installer? Why is ctrl-alt-f2 to get to a shell insufficient? An excellent point. If the needed CLI tools are provided by default, that's all that's really needed, isn't it? (Having this mentioned either in the installer's instructions or in the on-line Documentation would be a Good Idea as well.) -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21 partitioning circus
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 3:08 PM, Joe Zeff wrote: > On 02/25/2015 01:57 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: >> >> I refuse your premise. The feature requesters have no champion >> offering to even create this hypothetical Expert Mode, therefore no >> one is refusing to patch bugs for something that doesn't even exist. > > > Just to be clear, do you mean "I refuse to accept your premise" or "I refute > your premise?" The former. > If the former, there's no need to continue this thread > because you're completely unwilling to accept the possibility that you might > be wrong; No in fact I love being wrong, it means I get to learn something new and I value that more than being right. But shadenfreude is delicious, so I also like causing dissonance in others when I think they're wrong. In this case, your premise is refused because it hinges on something that is false: "refusing to patch bugs if you're using Expert Mode". What bugs? What refusal? What Expert Mode? > As far as what corner cases I'm thinking about, when I first started moving > from Windows to Linux I had a very odd partitioning layout for Windows, > because it allowed me to isolate various projects from each other and limit > the disk space they used. At that time, it was easy to accommodate this > when I installed Linux, but I'm very uncertain if I could get it to do what > I want today. So 75+ emails on a thread about how the installer can't do what you want, and it's actually based on uncertainty? You need more Pai Mei in your life. I have obviously been way, way too diplomatic and patient. > For me, this is purely academic as that disk's been archived > and I no longer need that weird layout, but it's left me very well aware > that One Size Doesn't Fit All and we shouldn't pretend that it does. From the very start I said the installer UI should be more use case oriented to help users get optimized layouts, NOT ONE SIZE FITS ALL, while also not requiring they be experts in leveraging Linux's advanced storage technologies. I'm arguing against both one size fits all, and "let's give users razor blades and tell them to go play on the freeway and then blame them for their own mistakes, and so they can go suck on eggs." -- Chris Murphy -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21 partitioning circus
On 02/25/2015 01:57 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: I refuse your premise. The feature requesters have no champion offering to even create this hypothetical Expert Mode, therefore no one is refusing to patch bugs for something that doesn't even exist. Just to be clear, do you mean "I refuse to accept your premise" or "I refute your premise?" If the former, there's no need to continue this thread because you're completely unwilling to accept the possibility that you might be wrong; if the latter, you need to learn that simply stating that I'm wrong doesn't refute me. As far as what corner cases I'm thinking about, when I first started moving from Windows to Linux I had a very odd partitioning layout for Windows, because it allowed me to isolate various projects from each other and limit the disk space they used. At that time, it was easy to accommodate this when I installed Linux, but I'm very uncertain if I could get it to do what I want today. For me, this is purely academic as that disk's been archived and I no longer need that weird layout, but it's left me very well aware that One Size Doesn't Fit All and we shouldn't pretend that it does. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21 partitioning circus
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Heinz Diehl wrote: > An example could be something like this: a button which opens a shell with > fdisk or gparted or similar, wich then jumps back to anaconda when > partitioning > is done, which then rereads the disk layout and let me enter the mountpoints > would suffice. Why do you need a button in the installer? Why is ctrl-alt-f2 to get to a shell insufficient? And then once you're done with CLI tools doing whatever you need to do, you return to the installer with ctrl-alt-f1 or f6 (live vs netinstall/dvd) and then click the "Reload storage configuration from disk" button (the one that looks like a web browser reload icon, circle arrow, to the right of the + and - mountpoint buttons). Why is this insufficient? >I'm sure that's fewer lines of code than the custom function > which has been in F19. I don't know what custom function you're referring to that's in F19, but not F18 or F20. -- Chris Murphy -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21 partitioning circus
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Joe Zeff wrote: > On 02/25/2015 12:14 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: >> >> One single button with 4000 lines of code behind it. You assume that >> providing full control in a GUI just happens magically as if that work >> is already done and the Anaconda folks are willfully disabling things. > > > I doubt that. OK well you don't know. And as I've at least had the courtesy to look at the code, even though I don't read python, I know that seemingly innocuously simple things aren't actually simple. It's not merely about sanity checks. If the underlying program doesn't like what you've done and exits with something other than 0, presumably you want to know why and that error handling has to be coded, it doesn't just pass through. If it did just pass through, why aren't you using kickstart or CLI tools in the first place? > What we want is a way to turn off most of what the devs would > consider sanity checks, and get back to the old Unix idea of not stopping > you from doing something crazy if it also stops me from doing something > clever. You haven't even stated what clever thing you want to do that the installer, as it exists now, won't let you do. I suspect you don't want what you think is clever actually eviscerated as a bad idea. > And really, what's the difference between refusing to patch bugs if > you're using Expert Mode and refusing to examine kernel bugs if the kernel's > "tainted," at least from the end-user's POV? I refuse your premise. The feature requesters have no champion offering to even create this hypothetical Expert Mode, therefore no one is refusing to patch bugs for something that doesn't even exist. And refusing to examine bugs on tainted kernels is completely legitimate because it requires deep understanding and time to know exactly how far a particular out of tree patch or driver is affecting the kernel, in order to know whether it's related to a kernel bug. This is known as defining boundaries of responsibility. It's not like the kernel devs are being arbitrary with their boundaries, they're in fact being really clear about it. -- Chris Murphy -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21 partitioning circus
On 02/25/2015 01:44 PM, Tom Horsley wrote: Since 21 there is no "complete" version. About the only way to not use live media is to use netinstall. So? Next time I do a clean install, that's what I'll use. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21 partitioning circus
On Wed, 25 Feb 2015 13:23:32 -0800 Joe Zeff wrote: > I've had to do a clean install of Fedora, I've always used the complete > install version Since 21 there is no "complete" version. About the only way to not use live media is to use netinstall. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21 partitioning circus
On 02/25/2015 01:14 PM, Mike Wohlgemuth wrote: I'm not clear how this is better than just running fdisk off the live image before running the installer, though. Well, what about those people who don't install from a live image? When I've had to do a clean install of Fedora, I've always used the complete install version so that I could select what I wanted installed instead of having to play around with a live version, and/or get what I wanted (and get rid of what I didn't want) later. I'm only guessing, but it seems reasonable to me that most of us who want more control probably do the same thing. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21 partitioning circus
On Wed, 2015-02-25 at 12:56 -0800, Joe Zeff wrote: > On 02/25/2015 12:46 PM, Heinz Diehl wrote: > > An example could be something like this: a button which opens a shell with > > fdisk or gparted or similar, > > I like that. If you don't know enough Linux to use those tools (or how > to read and understand whatever help they give) you probably don't know > enough about the potential consequences of what you want to do. That > would be an excellent pons asinorum that would weed out most of the > users who have overestimated their own knowledge and skills. I presume > that the GUI already has sanity checks that make sure that you don't put > directories that must be on the root filesystem for booting onto > separate partitions, and those would still apply. I'm not clear how this is better than just running fdisk off the live image before running the installer, though. Woogie -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21 partitioning circus
On 02/25/2015 12:46 PM, Heinz Diehl wrote: An example could be something like this: a button which opens a shell with fdisk or gparted or similar, I like that. If you don't know enough Linux to use those tools (or how to read and understand whatever help they give) you probably don't know enough about the potential consequences of what you want to do. That would be an excellent pons asinorum that would weed out most of the users who have overestimated their own knowledge and skills. I presume that the GUI already has sanity checks that make sure that you don't put directories that must be on the root filesystem for booting onto separate partitions, and those would still apply. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21 partitioning circus
On 02/25/2015 12:14 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: One single button with 4000 lines of code behind it. You assume that providing full control in a GUI just happens magically as if that work is already done and the Anaconda folks are willfully disabling things. I doubt that. What we want is a way to turn off most of what the devs would consider sanity checks, and get back to the old Unix idea of not stopping you from doing something crazy if it also stops me from doing something clever. And really, what's the difference between refusing to patch bugs if you're using Expert Mode and refusing to examine kernel bugs if the kernel's "tainted," at least from the end-user's POV? -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21 partitioning circus
On 25.02.2015, Chris Murphy wrote: > One single button with 4000 lines of code behind it. You assume that > providing full control in a GUI just happens magically as if that work > is already done and the Anaconda folks are willfully disabling things. Not at all. An example could be something like this: a button which opens a shell with fdisk or gparted or similar, wich then jumps back to anaconda when partitioning is done, which then rereads the disk layout and let me enter the mountpoints would suffice. I'm sure that's fewer lines of code than the custom function which has been in F19. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21 partitioning circus
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 6:41 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On 02/24/2015 05:56 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: >> >> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 8:51 AM, Ralf Corsepius >> wrote: > > >>> Similar restriction apply elsewhere. E.g. I have an older BIOS system >>> which >>> for (at least to me) unknown reasons refuses to boot from >>> chained/cascaded >>> grub partitions beyond some disk-limits. >> >> >> Quite old, > > > It's a 2008 netbook, I am facing this issue with. It has Windows, Fedora 20, > Fedora 21, Ubuntu and SuSE installed in parallel on ca. 12-15 partitions. I mean the BIOS, not computer. I have a ~2002 computer with ~2004 BIOS firmware (updated) that boots from 2+TB drives using GPT where BIOSBoot is not at the start but quite beyond 1TB and it works. In other configurations I've had it where there's no partition map at all, and I put the bootloader in the 64KB pad on Btrfs. That works. Anyway, I don't know why your firmware is uncooperative but it ought not be up to the firmware once GRUB is loaded. > >>> In more complex multiboot configurations (e.g. several different linux >>> distros, several releases of the same distro, several different >>> configurations of the same distro), other aspects come into play, which >>> more >>> or less are personal preference, such as keeping an OSs' partitions >>> consecutively together, whether to share or not to share boot or swap >>> partitions etc. >> >> >> Right and this cannot possibly be supported by Fedora absent an agreed >> upon boot specification. > > Why would you want to try supporting this? I definitely don't. I'd rather a finger in my eyeball. > > An "Expert mode" with options to partition manually, an option to manually > specify the install location of a boot loader/partition and to specify mount > points would suffice this need. In Fedora, "supported" basically means we block on it if it doesn't work. The installer is sacrosanct, everything offered in it should work or we should block: the reality is that QA is more tolerant of such broken things than I am, mainly because they already put in massive amounts of time on blockers that are installer related, and if they blocked on every broken thing in the installer we'd never ship. And that's the reason why I take the position I have which is: it cannot be important enough to even be included in the first place, if we don't have the resources to test every single option, every single outcome, and block if they don't work as intended. Expert modes in GUIs are dog crap. They're a cesspool for bugs to creep in and blow up in hapless users' faces and I think that's inherently wrong. It's worse to have a bug in a GUI that breaks someone's system than it is to strip out all the "expert" stuff and not even offer it in the GUI to begin with. Expert mode is kickstart and the CLI tools that do exactly what you want. > >>> But the converse applies: "A tool which doesn't suffice my needs, will >>> not >>> be my choice and will loose me as a customer" >> >> >> Yes, but it's a 60+ email thread and the people complaining about >> Anaconda Manual Partitioning, especially the "custom isn't custom" >> claim haven't produced any examples or bugs of what they want to do >> that the installer won't allow. > > This is no surprise to me. Most people (comprising me) don't do installs on > a regular basis. > > All I can say, last time I performed a fresh install on a machine with > pre-configured Windows, back in Dec, I tried to use automated partitioning > but it failed (Sorry, I did not keep book about it). > I found myself resorting to manually resizing/moving partitions using > Windows and gparted from rescuecd, and later pre-partitioned it for Fedora, > again using rescuecd. Afterwards, installation went real problems. > > A detail I recall on another machine was the Live-DVD-stuff having failing > miserably, because it ran out of memory and bombed out due to Gnome's > requirement on 3d. I ended up using the Xfce-DVD and preconfiguring a swap > partition. What you're talking about is the installer's expert mode! That's as expert as it gets, and you're saying that it's broken in your case, so then you're complaining about how it ought to work. There is no free lunch here. Where are the bug reports? If people aren't actually going to test what we have, and file bug report, so it has a chance of getting fixed, it just proves my point that these things should be removed. We need less, not more stuff that people won't test. Get rid of the boogers that we can't seem to flick off. Stability and trustworthiness are immensely more valuable in a GUI installer than "expert" features; let alone "expert" features that only sometimes work. -- Chris Murphy -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list
Re: F21 partitioning circus
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 1:44 AM, Heinz Diehl wrote: > On 24.02.2015, jd1008 wrote: > >> Myself, I always know how to tell anaconda I will manually partition >> the drive, without resorting to external tools. >> But I cannot assume that ALL other people have the know-how to >> manually partition their drives. > > A simple solution would be to do whatever is necessary for the vast majority > in anaconda, but to have one single button which says: "full control, > do what you want, this can eat your dog". One single button with 4000 lines of code behind it. You assume that providing full control in a GUI just happens magically as if that work is already done and the Anaconda folks are willfully disabling things. That's not how it works. In the GUI world, there is a void. Where there is substance, there is a lot of code. So when you say full control to do what you want, you're talking about a lot of substance and therefore a lots and lots of code. And setting that aside, it's really not OK to put hurt me buttons in GUI programs. The disclosure really doesn't get you out of blowing up someone's setup. I mean, presumably you want it to work, otherwise why are you asking for it? So now it has to be tested, and bugs found, and it all has to be maintained or it will break. > Bug reports based on the > use of this button automatically would be labeled WONTFIX. Period. Right well, we've seen this happen already with system-config-lvm being deprecated, and a bunch (all?) LVM support in Gnome Disks being yanked. No one wanted to do the work to maintain this stuff. So away it goes. So you're saying that someone should build it, and then not maintain it, and once it breaks the bugs are set to WONTFIX meaning overtime the entire interface you're talking about building is completely untrustworthy. No. When you sign up for building roads, you're signing up for maintaining them. If you don't have the budget or interest to make them safe and usable for some decent period of time, don't build in them in the first place. It's a waste of resources. > Following this thread, I guess this won't happen.. I'm not associated with the installer team. I have no idea what their plans are. I have very little idea of what sorts of things they'd accept. Therefore I do not speak for them at all. But I can pretty much guarantee you they are not going to maintain someone else's idea, nor would they accept an additional interface without a maintenance plan. And that assumes you've presented a viable use case scenario. Based on what I'm hearing, I'd recommend no go. Instead, please put these resources into accessibility. I'd rather make life easier for the vision impaired before spending more resources coddling so called power users who won't/can't use CLI tools or kickstart and want to produce questionable layouts. At least you have some tools to do what you want. Let's get real. -- Chris Murphy -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: computer boot (some times) in emergency mode.
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 1:53 AM, Angelo Moreschini <
mrangelo.fed...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> my computer often (not all the time) has problem at booting ...
>
> When it happen, it boot to emergency mode...
>
> (after I install new updates, then this problem occurs regularly)
>
> The message that I get, when the problem come, are (approximately):
>
>
>
> Welcome to emergency mode! after logging in , type "journalctl -xb" to
> view system log ...
>
> SError: {RecovRecovCom PHYRdyChg CommWake 10B8B DevExch }
>
> failed commend : READ DMA
>
Please don't trim the messages to tidy them, include the entire thing, or
post the rdsosreport.txt if one was generated.
Statistically speaking, the errors you post are probably due to a failed
read on a critical sector that the system simply can't proceed without
reading, so it waits for the drive to recover, and hits the kernel SCSI
command timer limit which is 30 seconds.
If that's true, you might be able to fix the problem by booting with
parameter rd.break=cmdline which gets you to a command line before anything
is mounted (not even read only). And then do:
# echo 120 > /sys/block/sda/device/timeout
This will change the command timer, allowing the drive to do a long
recovery and possibly enabling the bad sector to be read. I would do an
e2fsck -f (assuming it's an ext fs). If it's a bad sector, and if file
system metadata is on it, there's a possibility it can be fixed. Any writes
to this bad sector will solve the problem, either by refreshing the
existing sector's data or by remapping it if it's persistently failing
writes too. You'll see all of this in dmesg.
If there are no errors in dmesg or fsck, then it's not fs metadata that's
affected, it's data (binaries most likely). And that's slightly more
difficult to fix. But if you just use
# exit
that will continue with the startup process from the break. And the
command timer change might allow the drive to recover this data. If not, at
the very least, again if it's a bad sector, you'll get something in dmesg
that's explicitly a read error and will have an LBA associated with it. Now
you can find out what file's data is on that LBA using debugfs and
reinstall that binary (hopefully) which causes the problem to be fixed also.
--
Chris Murphy
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fedora 20: After running yum update the Mate Terminal doesn't start anymore
> On Mon, 2015-02-23 at 12:49 -1000, Jim Lewis wrote: >> I ran "yum update" on my Fedora 20 system a few days ago. I normally >> don't do this as something always breaks and in this case it was the >> Mate-Terminal. > > I can't say that I have that experience, it's very rare that an update > breaks something on my system. Sounds like you have something wrong > with your system, more than Fedora in general. > > What does "very rare" mean? So it has happened to you on occasion? It happens to me on occasion and certainly does to others as well and so I don't trust it. I want an update to improve my system, not make it worse. The problem is still there and no I have not rebooted yet. Actually, I should point out that the update did solve the audio problem I was having with Skype. Since the pulseaudio files were now brought up to the correct version I was now able to install the 32-bit ones. Works great. Any idea if a reboot will fix this, or will I lose access to the Mate terminal completely? Jim Lewis -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Where are libssl and libssl-dev/devel or their equivalents on fedora ?
On 02/24/2015 06:14 AM, Aaron Gray wrote: sorry for the noise ! On 24 February 2015 at 11:48, Aaron Gray wrote: Hi, Where are libssl and libssl-dev/devel or their equivalents on fedora ? Sorry I am confused ! Many thanks in advance, The RPMs are openssl, openssl-libs, and openssl-devel. -- - Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigitalri...@alldigital.com - - AIM/Skype: therps2ICQ: 22643734Yahoo: origrps2 - -- - The Navy's a bunch of wimps! MY job's an adventure! - -- -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fedora 20: After running yum update the Mate Terminal doesn't start anymore
On Mon, 2015-02-23 at 12:49 -1000, Jim Lewis wrote: > I ran "yum update" on my Fedora 20 system a few days ago. I normally > don't do this as something always breaks and in this case it was the > Mate-Terminal. I can't say that I have that experience, it's very rare that an update breaks something on my system. Sounds like you have something wrong with your system, more than Fedora in general. -- tim@localhost ~]$ uname -rsvp Linux 3.18.7-100.fc20.i686 #1 SMP Wed Feb 11 21:16:53 UTC 2015 i686 All mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted, there is no point trying to privately email me, I will only read messages posted to the public lists. George Orwell's '1984' was supposed to be a warning against tyranny, not a set of instructions for supposedly democratic governments. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Problems setting default mailer
I have been wrestling with setting the default mailer in Fedora 21 under mate. when I use xdg-settings set default-url-scheme-handler mailto mozilla-thunderbird.desktop It says the desktop environment is unknown. Can anyone tell me where the envronment under Mate is supposed to be set ? -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Restoring the usual graphical boot panel
On Wed, 2015-02-25 at 08:16 +, Paul Smith wrote: > On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 8:06 AM, Joe Zeff wrote: > >> > >> After having installed the NVidia proprietary drivers, the usual boot > >> panel with a ball with an "F" in the middle does not show up anymore; > >> now, I get a bar at the bottom of the screen, which increases its > >> length as the booting activity is progressing. Is it possible to get > >> back the usual graphical boot panel? > > > > Only by removing the nVidia drivers. Sorry. > > Thanks, Joe. That is not a big problem this nVidia drivers side effect! > May be something unique to your system. Works fine here on mine. Still, I doubt it's worth the trouble to chase down. I believe the relationship between the nVidia proprietary drivers and Fedora is tenuous at best. Once working the smart course is to leave it alone and treat proposed updates with fear and extreme skepticism. RBM -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21 partitioning circus
On 02/24/2015 05:56 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 8:51 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: Similar restriction apply elsewhere. E.g. I have an older BIOS system which for (at least to me) unknown reasons refuses to boot from chained/cascaded grub partitions beyond some disk-limits. Quite old, It's a 2008 netbook, I am facing this issue with. It has Windows, Fedora 20, Fedora 21, Ubuntu and SuSE installed in parallel on ca. 12-15 partitions. In more complex multiboot configurations (e.g. several different linux distros, several releases of the same distro, several different configurations of the same distro), other aspects come into play, which more or less are personal preference, such as keeping an OSs' partitions consecutively together, whether to share or not to share boot or swap partitions etc. Right and this cannot possibly be supported by Fedora absent an agreed upon boot specification. Why would you want to try supporting this? An "Expert mode" with options to partition manually, an option to manually specify the install location of a boot loader/partition and to specify mount points would suffice this need. But the converse applies: "A tool which doesn't suffice my needs, will not be my choice and will loose me as a customer" Yes, but it's a 60+ email thread and the people complaining about Anaconda Manual Partitioning, especially the "custom isn't custom" claim haven't produced any examples or bugs of what they want to do that the installer won't allow. This is no surprise to me. Most people (comprising me) don't do installs on a regular basis. All I can say, last time I performed a fresh install on a machine with pre-configured Windows, back in Dec, I tried to use automated partitioning but it failed (Sorry, I did not keep book about it). I found myself resorting to manually resizing/moving partitions using Windows and gparted from rescuecd, and later pre-partitioned it for Fedora, again using rescuecd. Afterwards, installation went real problems. A detail I recall on another machine was the Live-DVD-stuff having failing miserably, because it ran out of memory and bombed out due to Gnome's requirement on 3d. I ended up using the Xfce-DVD and preconfiguring a swap partition. Ralf -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: nfs shares not mounted at boot
On 02/25/15 17:48, Jens Neu wrote: > On 02/23/2015 05:18 PM, Tim wrote: >> On Mon, 2015-02-23 at 09:17 +, Andrew R Paterson wrote: >>> This poroblem occurs on other unices as well, try using the bg option >>> in your nfs fstab entry. >> Putting fstab entries in is really only useful for what I consider to be >> permanently available shares (or drives, if we're not talking about >> nfs). i.e. Things that are *always* present. > I consider these shares to be "always present" and the host won't function > properly without them. So I don't want to mess with automount stuff. FWIW, did you try just using the IP address? -- If you can't laugh at yourself, others will gladly oblige. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: nfs shares not mounted at boot
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 5:55 AM, Tom H wrote: > On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 4:45 AM, Jens Neu wrote: >> On 02/23/2015 10:17 AM, Andrew R Paterson wrote: >>> >>> This poroblem occurs on other unices as well, try using the bg option in >>> your nfs fstab entry. >> >> unfortunatley option bg does not resolve it. mount -a still is the way to >> go. > > Pre-systemd there was a "_netdev" option for network mounts. It should > still work. > > You can also create a .mount systemd unit. > > For example: > > # cat /etc/systemd/system/mnt-fedora.mount > [Unit] > After=network-online.target > [Mount] > What=127.0.0.1:/srv > Where=/mnt/fedora > Type=nfs > Options=nfsvers=4 > > # sc status mnt-fedora.mount > ● mnt-fedora.mount - /mnt/fedora >Loaded: loaded (/etc/systemd/system/mnt-fedora.mount; static; > vendor preset: enabled) >Active: active (mounted) since Wed 2015-02-25 05:51:12 EST; 6s ago > Where: /mnt/fedora > What: 127.0.0.1:/srv > Process: 4491 ExecMount=/bin/mount 127.0.0.1:/srv /mnt/fedora -n -t > nfs -o nfsvers=4 (code=exited, status=0/SUCCESS) > > Feb 25 05:51:12 yoga.lenovo systemd[1]: Mounting /mnt/fedora... > Feb 25 05:51:12 yoga.lenovo systemd[1]: Mounted /mnt/fedora. Don't forget to comment out the nfs fstab entry. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: nfs shares not mounted at boot
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 4:45 AM, Jens Neu wrote: > On 02/23/2015 10:17 AM, Andrew R Paterson wrote: >> >> This poroblem occurs on other unices as well, try using the bg option in >> your nfs fstab entry. > > unfortunatley option bg does not resolve it. mount -a still is the way to > go. Pre-systemd there was a "_netdev" option for network mounts. It should still work. You can also create a .mount systemd unit. For example: # cat /etc/systemd/system/mnt-fedora.mount [Unit] After=network-online.target [Mount] What=127.0.0.1:/srv Where=/mnt/fedora Type=nfs Options=nfsvers=4 # sc status mnt-fedora.mount ● mnt-fedora.mount - /mnt/fedora Loaded: loaded (/etc/systemd/system/mnt-fedora.mount; static; vendor preset: enabled) Active: active (mounted) since Wed 2015-02-25 05:51:12 EST; 6s ago Where: /mnt/fedora What: 127.0.0.1:/srv Process: 4491 ExecMount=/bin/mount 127.0.0.1:/srv /mnt/fedora -n -t nfs -o nfsvers=4 (code=exited, status=0/SUCCESS) Feb 25 05:51:12 yoga.lenovo systemd[1]: Mounting /mnt/fedora... Feb 25 05:51:12 yoga.lenovo systemd[1]: Mounted /mnt/fedora. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: nfs shares not mounted at boot
On 02/23/2015 05:18 PM, Tim wrote: On Mon, 2015-02-23 at 09:17 +, Andrew R Paterson wrote: This poroblem occurs on other unices as well, try using the bg option in your nfs fstab entry. Putting fstab entries in is really only useful for what I consider to be permanently available shares (or drives, if we're not talking about nfs). i.e. Things that are *always* present. I consider these shares to be "always present" and the host won't function properly without them. So I don't want to mess with automount stuff. -Jens -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: nfs shares not mounted at boot
On 02/23/2015 10:17 AM, Andrew R Paterson wrote: This poroblem occurs on other unices as well, try using the bg option in your nfs fstab entry. Andy unfortunatley option bg does not resolve it. mount -a still is the way to go. -Jens -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
computer boot (some times) in emergency mode.
Hi,
my computer often (not all the time) has problem at booting ...
When it happen, it boot to emergency mode...
(after I install new updates, then this problem occurs regularly)
The message that I get, when the problem come, are (approximately):
Welcome to emergency mode! after logging in , type "journalctl -xb" to view
system log ...
SError: {RecovRecovCom PHYRdyChg CommWake 10B8B DevExch }
failed commend : READ DMA
...
exception Emask 0x10 SAct 0x0 Serr 0x40d0002 action 0x0 frozen
SError: {RecovCom PHYRdyCh CommWake 10808 DevExch}
status: {DRY}
exception Emask 0x10 SAct 0x0 Serr 0x40d0002 action 0x0 frozen
...
status {Busy}
.
failed command : READ DMA
Status {DRY}
In this link
http://ubuntuforums.org/archive/index.php/t-1034762.html
I read that this problem happen frequently; and it is not sure if is a HD
problem or a SW problem...
Someone suggest to disable the ports of all bus not SATA in the bios...
In this other link:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1034762
someone said that, on Ubuntu, he was able to solve the problem changing
options in the file /etc/modprobe.d/options
= = = = =
It's Kernel bug on ata acpi
Put "options libata noacpi=1" on /etc/modprobe.d/options
= = = = =
In my case surly the problem is connected with the HD; this because,
trying to change HD, the problem disappeared only re-plugging the caves of
the HD.
- - - - - - - - -
I would like have some suggestion about this problem
thank you
regard
Angelo
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: F21 partitioning circus
On 24.02.2015, jd1008 wrote: > Myself, I always know how to tell anaconda I will manually partition > the drive, without resorting to external tools. > But I cannot assume that ALL other people have the know-how to > manually partition their drives. A simple solution would be to do whatever is necessary for the vast majority in anaconda, but to have one single button which says: "full control, do what you want, this can eat your dog". Bug reports based on the use of this button automatically would be labeled WONTFIX. Period. Following this thread, I guess this won't happen.. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Restoring the usual graphical boot panel
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 8:06 AM, Joe Zeff wrote: >> >> After having installed the NVidia proprietary drivers, the usual boot >> panel with a ball with an "F" in the middle does not show up anymore; >> now, I get a bar at the bottom of the screen, which increases its >> length as the booting activity is progressing. Is it possible to get >> back the usual graphical boot panel? > > Only by removing the nVidia drivers. Sorry. Thanks, Joe. That is not a big problem this nVidia drivers side effect! Paul -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Restoring the usual graphical boot panel
On 02/25/2015 12:00 AM, Paul Smith wrote: After having installed the NVidia proprietary drivers, the usual boot panel with a ball with an "F" in the middle does not show up anymore; now, I get a bar at the bottom of the screen, which increases its length as the booting activity is progressing. Is it possible to get back the usual graphical boot panel? Only by removing the nVidia drivers. Sorry. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Restoring the usual graphical boot panel
Dear All, After having installed the NVidia proprietary drivers, the usual boot panel with a ball with an "F" in the middle does not show up anymore; now, I get a bar at the bottom of the screen, which increases its length as the booting activity is progressing. Is it possible to get back the usual graphical boot panel? Thanks in advance, Paul -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
